Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PC64


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Cirt (talk) 07:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

PC64

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 03:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 02:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I used this in the past, but I have no idea if it has significant coverage. There appear to be separate articles for a number of Commodore 64 emulators, and if they are in similar states, I'd suggest a merge into one larger article over successive deletions.--Milowent (talk) 06:36, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - we seem not to have a general article on Commodore 64 emulation; this would be worth a mention there, but not as a stand alone article. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 18:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete the existing article has zero sources and fails WP:V and WP:N. A general article on C64 emulation should be written, and source based information on this software might fit there. This content won't be necessary for a source based re-write. Miami33139 (talk) 21:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. LOL, am I allowed to follow up Miami33139?  *eyeroll*  I just searched Google Books and Google News Archives, found nothing.  Not even one single relevant match, not even in passing.  JBsupreme (talk) 22:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.